From: David Abrahams (david.abrahams_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-02-01 14:46:44
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gustavo Guerra" <gustavobt_at_[hidden]>
> > I don't think we should be basing design decisions on any compiler,
> period. I
> > too would vote against an interface that represents a compromise due to
> > current compiler technology.
> I took a look at the proposal, and there's no macros on the interface. He
> just used macros on the implementation to avoid repetition, where he could
> have used the Currioulsy Recuring Template pattern. Isn't the interface
> important thing here?
FWIW my sentiments about are not so religious as many expressed here
recently regarding interface adjustments for less-conforming compilers. When
it comes putting macros in the public interface (which I gather Daryle
hasn't done), that's where I draw the line.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk